Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by tcp_handshaker 52 days ago
>> After doing a bit more digging, the reality is more interesting than the video implies.

You are approaching this from the scientific angle. The reality is even worst that the video implies.

As soon as Neanderthals became genetic relatives of many living non-Africans ,-) Western portrayals became more willing to imagine them as human like, and even ...white.

"How Neanderthals Became White: The Introgression of Race into Contemporary Human Evolutionary Genetics" - https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/720130

"‘Race’ and the Changing Representations of Neanderthals" - https://scholar.xjtlu.edu.cn/en/publications/race-and-the-ch...

"Making the Neanderthals White: Historicizing Ancestry, Race, and Hominin Heritage" - https://philpapers.org/rec/KERMTN

2 comments

The reality is that it's far more complicated than you make it seem.

Archaeology has not been taken over by WYT racist plotting. Neanderthalis did get an undeserved reputation for being thick and dumb. We're correcting that.

And, some people are grabbing onto bits and pieces, and trying to reconstruct that into some racist BS. Similarly, certain things from Norse history are being coopted, but that doesn't mean every new discovery or article about viking exploits is inherently part of a racist conspiracy.

Fair point, and those papers are interesting (particularly the first one, which directly talks about this..).

I think we might be talking about two different things though. The scientific evidence for Neanderthal sophistication was there from the late 1950s; Straus and Cave reexamined the La Chapelle skeleton I spoke about earlier and basically said "this fella could ride the subway in new york and nobody would look twice", the Shanidar burials showed care for the sick, and there were decades of tool and burial evidence piling up after that. So the science was there, it just wasn't penetrating into popular culture.

And I think that's where your sources make a good point, the DNA discovery in 2010 probably did act as the catalyst for the popular rehabilitation. It gave journalists and TV producers a reason to care about something archaeologists had been saying for decades. Whether that reason worked because of racial identification specifically or because "you have caveman DNA" is just a more compelling headline is probably where we'd disagree; I suspect it's both, honestly.

Where I'd still push back a little is on the framing that this was purely a "white people found out they're related, so rebrand" phenomenon. The racial hierarchy framework that created the original caricature was already academically dead well before 2010, the correction was happening regardless, it maybe just wasn't getting airtime.